Zara drew harsh criticism this week after the owner of the clothing franchise in Israel hosted controversial right-wing lawmaker Itamar Ben Gvir in an election parlor.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
Many in the Arab sector called for a boycott of Zara and Schwebel's other businesses, with lawmakers choosing not to remain on the sidelines and filing a complaint with the company.
Unofficial data says that sales at Zara branches in Arab areas have plummeted, especially in Nazareth, although it is unclear whether the phenomenon will grow, and in my personal opinion, the boycott will pass soon, and the affair will be quickly forgotten.
The public has a short memory, and in any case, the focus will change the day after the election. Instead of responding to the matter, which is the result of the personal choice of the owner, not the company or its employees, by encouraging more Arab Israelis to vote on election day, some of the posts actually discouraged it and used the incident to support their calls for a political boycott.
We know that business people and politicians, Jews and Arabs alike, maintain ties that serve their interests without a direct or profound connection to ideology. A well-known example is politicians raising money for their parties from various business people¸ but by hosting Ben Gvir, Schwebel did identify with an ideology. As such, there is a real danger that Zara will be labeled in connection with it, especially by the company's competitors, rather than by the Arab public as a whole.
Having said that, one must know how to distinguish between the business activities of Zara, or any other business, and the personal decisions of those in charge. Because if Zara's revenue drops, there is no doubt it will decide to reduce its activities in Arab localities.
That will directly impact consumers, first and foremost affecting prices.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
